No, he is not right with respect to my "disclosure."
They are already registered so the authorities already know of their existence and the fact that I own them.
Republishing what is already known by the governent is disclosing no more information than is already known. The government is obtaining no more information than is already known pursuant to official records.
Therefore, I am not subject to any of the risks that are being subscribed to me through my post.
It's not like we're going to wake up one day with police officers coming to our houses to collect our guns without very, very advanced warning. Such governmental action would be done through legislation in a thoroughly transparent process (we know the substance of bills that are voted on) and numerous constitutional court challenges thereafter.
It would literally take years from the time a law authorizing the government to confiscate weapons based on information specifically relevant to individuals was proposed to the time its enforcement could actually take place. (assuming such a law could even be enforced) Given the Supreme Court's clear shift to the right, there's not a chance that it would occur. Of course, even if it could occur, it would not be politically feasible. The trend in the states has been to liberalize gun laws over the past 6 years. We now have 38 right to carry states (I believe that the last three states were added in the last 5 years) and the assault weapon ban bill was allowed to die last year after the sunset provision. There was just not enough popular support for a feel good bill that had no practical impact on the criminal use of such weapons.